Oh Steve, you silly bastard...

[Rthur]

So, according to your logic, any government funded agency isn't credible? I'll ask you what I've been asking pmclane, what resource do you rely on to understand things that you don't?

You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.
So far you made the original statement with a link providing your scientific backing.
Please expound on why you feel the NASA link proves to you the basis of "Global warming/climate change".

R

 

[tna9001]

When did you stop beating your wife?

Not to answer for pmclaine but the resources I use to understand a subject vary with the subject and my previous level of knowledge of the underlying science behind it. Some things I know a lot about, some things I know nothing about, and many things I know something about.

So the short answer is: it depends.

The problem I see when it comes to these kinds of issues is, people, rely on what the believe and feel to determine what they think which has two problems. First, it leaves them open to manipulation from the media and politicians and second it's just ass backwards. Thinking should drive what you believe and feel.

The idea of dismissing science because it doesn't fit your political ideology is laughable. There is no question that climate change happens, the debate revolves around the question of what influence do humans have on it. So, anytime I hear someone say climate change is "fake news" I know they don't understand even the elementary basics of what they are talking about. Show me a peer-reviewed article or study that support your position.

 

[tna9001]

You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.
So far you made the original statement with a link providing your scientific backing.
Please expound on why you feel the NASA link proves to you the basis of "Global warming/climate change".

R

Did you look at NASA's website? Regardless of where you stand on the question of what impact humans have had on climate change NASA's site is full of good information to understand the climate.

There isn't a debate that the climate is changing, its been changing since the beginning before we were here. The question is, what impact have we had on it? Sounds like you are in a position to understand these complex scientific problems and come to a conclusion. As for me, I have to rely on external sources to figure this stuff out.

 

[308pirate]

So, anytime I hear someone say climate change is "fake news" I know they don't understand even the elementary basics of what they are talking about.

Nobody with two cells to rub together denies climate changes. It's done so throughout the history of this planet. Man's influence on it is the debate, and the politicized agenda flows from both ends of it.

One does not necessarily need to provide peer reviewed studies to refute other peer reviewed studies. Merely drawing attention to conflicts of interest on the part of the author and/or its reviewers is more than enough.

 

[Mike Casselton]

The problem I see when it comes to these kinds of issues is, people, rely on what the believe and feel to determine what they think which has two problems. First, it leaves them open to manipulation from the media and politicians and second it's just ass backwards. Thinking should drive what you believe and feel.

The idea of dismissing science because it doesn't fit your political ideology is laughable. There is no question that climate change happens, the debate revolves around the question of what influence do humans have on it. So, anytime I hear someone say climate change is "fake news" I know they don't understand even the elementary basics of what they are talking about. Show me a peer-reviewed article or study that support your position.

1. Actually, FACTS should drive what a person believes.

2. Peer review? Are you kidding. You are trying to get us to believe that peers are the best source to verify facts from fiction?
If that were true, I could believe anything the liberal media says. I mean, they all say the same bullshit, so it must be true. Right?

Dude, you sound very intelligent, but you contradict the living shit out of your own statements.

 

[pmclaine]

How have you discerned my political ideology? You somehow believe I support Soros? I'll ask again, what resource do you rely on to understand things you don't?

I rely on my observation of environment and 50 years of being fed bullshit.

I see the likes of Obama telling me 68 is a good thermostat setting while the oval office temp is set at "greenhouse"

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/29/obama-cranks-up-white-hou_n_162127.html

I know Huff post is "right wing".

I grew up remembering Newsweeks cover of a glacier covering NYC and the coming ice age, I remember the "global warming" BS, now Im into "climate change".....meanwhile Al Gore takes private jets and when he lights his house the local town browns out. Obam gets on a 747 the day he leaves office with 4 passengers only aboard.

These are the people that want to tell me how to live....

http://fortune.com/2015/01/22/davos-out-of-touch/

You dont think NASA is political?

NASA got brought down a notch by Obam in a purely political move.

We are currently Ohhing and Ahhing because a guy (heavily subsidized by US) sent a compact car into space.

NASA used to send a space ship into orbit regularly with a crew of 7, a robotic arm, cargo bay than fly that mother fucker back to earth.

NASA now begs for space available on Russian rockets and prints out whatever propaganda the powers that be request.

I dont need to go somewhere to be told how to think.

Why dont you get off your knees and think for yourself?

Too scared?

 

[Rthur]

Did you look at NASA's website? Regardless of where you stand on the question of what impact humans have had on climate change NASA's site is full of good information to understand the climate.

There isn't a debate that the climate is changing, its been changing since the beginning before we were here. The question is, what impact have we had on it? Sounds like you are in a position to understand these complex scientific problems and come to a conclusion. As for me, I have to rely on external sources to figure this stuff out.

One can derive solid standing on what has been predicted and failed as well as said but not promoted in the MSM.
My first experience with these "experiments" into society's beliefs was the ice age predictions in the 70's.
Another was the "gas/fuel" crisis of the early 70's.
These are but two examples of a pattern that has plagued "belief" systems.
As has been noted always check to see if there is a monetary benefit to any of the practitioners/proclaimers.
Experience has always trumped opinion.
Theory- a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

R

 

[pmclaine]

Another was the "gas/fuel" crisis of the early 70's.
R

Yes, the earth stopped producing oil how many years ago?

Thomas Malthus is still waiting on mass starvation and the collapse of the food chain he predicted back in the mid 18th century.

Mr Malthus was doing "Chicken Little" long before there was a "Chicken Little".

Im not poo pooing there can be problems but destruction of my kids future needs to be based on more than Al Gore wants open spaces and luxury for only a select elite.

We have read Brave New World, 1984, Kafka and etc.......we see that fiction is more fact than the promises made by the present day "elite".

 

[pmclaine]

Damn that right wing mouth piece Bloomberg...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-09/climate-change-just-got-a-little-less-terrible

Note that even if the present cut of our fossil fuels use is holding off "?climate change?" it is only regarded as a means that we promote more cutting of our fossil fuels. Its like Communism is enhanced by more Communism.

Damn maybe those Islands being overcome by rising tide really are not sinking....

https://phys.org/news/2018-02-pacific-nation-bigger.html

But does Hank Johnson still think if everyone stands on one side it will flip over?

and son of a bitch didnt someone come along and posit that the sun has a say in our climate

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/scientists-warn-unusually-cold-sun-will-we-face-another-ice-age-759865

UCal SanDiego study - they are like Hitler Jugend, no? Time for Newsweek to dust off the ice age cover.

tna9001 - its okay you can eat eggs again, the scientists say so. Enjoy those eggs with some good old bacon.

Ive got all my north oriented compasses in the for sale section if anyone is interested because "I read" how "many scientists" say the N/S poles will soon flip and Ill need new gear.

 

[Yasherka]

If AGW were real they wouldn't have to lie about it.

 

[308pirate]

Damn, rough crowd.......

 

[jungle45]

Hunters did an amazing job reintroducing Turkeys to California. It was a great man created success and they are now in most of the state

Most of them are in Sacramento and they make laws!

 

[pmclaine]

More winning with climate change.....Less Lightening!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5381867/Global-warming-reduce-lightning-strikes.html


Wait, Wut?

If the world getting warmer means less lightening than WTF do we have more electrical storms in summer/tropical areas?

I thought global warming involves temp changes of single digit degrees at the surface to become catastrophic.

Last I checked upper atmosphere temperatures where hail and sleet are generated temps are in the negative 0 ranges. Think Mt Everest.

How the fuck do single digit changes at surface effect ice formation at 25K E when water freezes at 32 degree F?